Software - Infrastructure
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FTNT vs CSCO vs PANW vs ANET vs MSFT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Communication Equipment
Software - Infrastructure
Computer Hardware
Software - Infrastructure
FTNT vs CSCO vs PANW vs ANET vs MSFT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Infrastructure | Communication Equipment | Software - Infrastructure | Computer Hardware | Software - Infrastructure |
| Market Cap | $79.89B | $364.95B | $138.16B | $178.49B | $3.13T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $7.11B | $59.05B | $9.89B | $9.71B | $318.27B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1.95B | $11.08B | $1.28B | $3.72B | $125.22B |
| Gross Margin | 80.7% | 64.4% | 73.5% | 63.5% | 68.3% |
| Operating Margin | 31.1% | 23.0% | 14.4% | 42.8% | 46.8% |
| Forward P/E | 36.3x | 22.2x | 53.3x | 40.0x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $996M | $29.64B | $338M | $0.00 | $112.18B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2.50B | $9.47B | $2.27B | $1.96B | $30.24B |
FTNT vs CSCO vs PANW vs ANET vs MSFT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fortinet, Inc. (FTNT) | 100 | 387.8 | +287.8% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) | 100 | 192.7 | +92.7% |
| Palo Alto Networks,… (PANW) | 100 | 501.2 | +401.2% |
| Arista Networks, In… (ANET) | 100 | 971.6 | +871.6% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 229.7 | +129.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FTNT vs CSCO vs PANW vs ANET vs MSFT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FTNT lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
CSCO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and dividends is your priority.
- Lower P/E (22.2x vs 25.3x)
- 1.7% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs MSFT's 0.8%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
Among these 5 stocks, PANW doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ANET carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 28.6%, EPS growth 23.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 27.1%
- 33.7% 10Y total return vs FTNT's 15.8%
- PEG 0.99 vs MSFT's 1.35
- 28.6% revenue growth vs CSCO's 5.3%
MSFT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 19 yrs, beta 0.89, yield 0.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.89, Low D/E 32.7%, current ratio 1.35x
- Beta 0.89, yield 0.8%, current ratio 1.35x
- 39.3% margin vs PANW's 13.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 28.6% revenue growth vs CSCO's 5.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (22.2x vs 25.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 39.3% margin vs PANW's 13.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.89 vs ANET's 2.15 | |
| Dividends | 1.7% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs MSFT's 0.8%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +64.0% vs MSFT's -2.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.7% ROA vs PANW's 5.1%, ROIC 32.8% vs 17.1% |
FTNT vs CSCO vs PANW vs ANET vs MSFT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FTNT vs CSCO vs PANW vs ANET vs MSFT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ANET leads in 2 of 6 categories
CSCO leads 1 • FTNT leads 0 • PANW leads 0 • MSFT leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — ANET and MSFT each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT is the larger business by revenue, generating $318.3B annually — 44.8x FTNT's $7.1B. MSFT is the more profitable business, keeping 39.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PANW's 13.0%. On growth, ANET holds the edge at +35.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $7.1B | $59.1B | $9.9B | $9.7B | $318.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.3B | $16.1B | $1.9B | $4.2B | $192.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $2.0B | $11.1B | $1.3B | $3.7B | $125.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $2.4B | $12.8B | $4.1B | $5.3B | $72.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +80.7% | +64.4% | +73.5% | +63.5% | +68.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +31.1% | +23.0% | +14.4% | +42.8% | +46.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +27.5% | +18.8% | +13.0% | +38.3% | +39.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +34.3% | +21.8% | +41.1% | +54.4% | +22.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +20.1% | +9.7% | +14.9% | +35.1% | +18.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +28.6% | +29.5% | +57.9% | +25.0% | +23.4% |
Valuation Metrics
CSCO leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 30.9x trailing earnings, MSFT trades at a 75% valuation discount to PANW's 122.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ANET offers better value at 1.27x vs MSFT's 1.64x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $79.9B | $365.0B | $138.2B | $178.5B | $3.13T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $78.4B | $385.1B | $136.2B | $176.5B | $3.21T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 44.43x | 36.14x | 122.83x | 51.55x | 30.86x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 36.28x | 22.18x | 53.30x | 40.02x | 25.34x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.34x | — | — | 1.27x | 1.64x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 35.09x | 26.34x | 85.88x | 44.93x | 19.72x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 11.75x | 6.44x | 14.98x | 19.82x | 11.10x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 65.26x | 7.87x | 17.82x | 14.62x | 9.15x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 35.89x | 27.46x | 39.82x | 41.97x | 43.66x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ANET leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FTNT delivers a 155.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $156 in annual profit, vs $14 for PANW. PANW carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FTNT's 0.81x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CSCO scores 8/9 vs ANET's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +155.7% | +23.2% | +13.6% | +30.6% | +33.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +19.4% | +9.0% | +5.1% | +19.7% | +19.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +13.0% | +17.1% | +32.8% | +24.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +37.7% | +13.7% | +8.9% | +30.4% | +29.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.81x | 0.63x | 0.04x | — | 0.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$1.5B | $20.2B | -$1.9B | -$2.0B | $81.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.5B | $9.5B | $2.3B | $2.0B | $30.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $996M | $29.6B | $338M | $0 | $112.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 214.35x | 9.64x | 1559.00x | — | 55.65x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ANET leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ANET five years ago would be worth $69,045 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $17,246 for MSFT. Over the past 12 months, ANET leads with a +64.0% total return vs MSFT's -2.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ANET at 60.1% vs MSFT's 11.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +38.6% | +22.3% | +9.6% | +6.1% | -10.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +1.2% | +57.5% | +4.5% | +64.0% | -2.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +63.4% | +109.3% | +105.2% | +310.6% | +39.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +154.9% | +87.2% | +244.4% | +590.5% | +72.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1584.4% | +301.7% | +746.7% | +3374.3% | +787.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +17.8% | +27.9% | +27.1% | +60.1% | +11.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CSCO and MSFT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MSFT is the less volatile stock with a 0.89 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ANET's 2.15 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CSCO currently trades 97.3% from its 52-week high vs MSFT's 75.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.02x | 0.92x | 1.02x | 2.15x | 0.89x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $112.39 | $94.72 | $223.61 | $179.80 | $555.45 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $70.12 | $59.07 | $139.57 | $82.80 | $356.28 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.1% | +97.3% | +87.9% | +78.8% | +75.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 64.3 | 63.9 | 61.6 | 41.4 | 54.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.8M | 18.9M | 7.5M | 7.3M | 32.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CSCO and MSFT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FTNT as "Hold", CSCO as "Buy", PANW as "Buy", ANET as "Buy", MSFT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 31.4% upside for ANET (target: $186) vs -19.6% for FTNT (target: $87). For income investors, CSCO offers the higher dividend yield at 1.75% vs MSFT's 0.77%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $86.81 | $96.50 | $207.85 | $186.25 | $551.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 68 | 73 | 86 | 51 | 81 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.7% | — | — | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 15 | — | — | 19 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.61 | — | — | $3.23 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.9% | +2.0% | 0.0% | +0.9% | +0.6% |
ANET leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). CSCO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
FTNT vs CSCO vs PANW vs ANET vs MSFT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FTNT or CSCO or PANW or ANET or MSFT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Arista Networks, Inc.
(ANET) is the stronger pick with 28. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 3% for Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO). Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) offers the better valuation at 30. 9x trailing P/E (25. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) a "Buy" — based on 73 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — FTNT or CSCO or PANW or ANET or MSFT?
On trailing P/E, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the cheapest at 30.
9x versus Palo Alto Networks, Inc. at 122. 8x. On forward P/E, Cisco Systems, Inc. is actually cheaper at 22. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Arista Networks, Inc. wins at 0. 99x versus Microsoft Corporation's 1. 35x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FTNT or CSCO or PANW or ANET or MSFT?
Over the past 5 years, Arista Networks, Inc.
(ANET) delivered a total return of +590. 5%, compared to +72. 5% for Microsoft Corporation (MSFT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ANET returned +33. 7% versus CSCO's +301. 7%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — FTNT or CSCO or PANW or ANET or MSFT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
89β versus Arista Networks, Inc. 's 2. 15β — meaning ANET is approximately 143% more volatile than MSFT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Palo Alto Networks, Inc. (PANW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 81% for Fortinet, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FTNT or CSCO or PANW or ANET or MSFT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Arista Networks, Inc.
(ANET) is pulling ahead at 28. 6% versus 5. 3% for Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Arista Networks, Inc. grew EPS 23. 3% year-over-year, compared to -56. 0% for Palo Alto Networks, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ANET leads at 27. 1% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — FTNT or CSCO or PANW or ANET or MSFT?
Arista Networks, Inc.
(ANET) is the more profitable company, earning 39. 0% net margin versus 12. 3% for Palo Alto Networks, Inc. — meaning it keeps 39. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSFT leads at 45. 6% versus 13. 5% for PANW. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FTNT leads at 80. 8%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is FTNT or CSCO or PANW or ANET or MSFT more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Arista Networks, Inc. (ANET) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 99x versus Microsoft Corporation's 1. 35x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) trades at 22. 2x forward P/E versus 53. 3x for Palo Alto Networks, Inc. — 31. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ANET: 31. 4% to $186. 25.
08Which pays a better dividend — FTNT or CSCO or PANW or ANET or MSFT?
In this comparison, CSCO (1.
7% yield), MSFT (0. 8% yield) pay a dividend. FTNT, PANW, ANET do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is FTNT or CSCO or PANW or ANET or MSFT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
89), 0. 8% yield, +787. 7% 10Y return). Arista Networks, Inc. (ANET) carries a higher beta of 2. 15 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSFT: +787. 7%, ANET: +33. 7%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between FTNT and CSCO and PANW and ANET and MSFT?
Both stocks operate in the Technology sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: FTNT is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CSCO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; PANW is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ANET is a mid-cap high-growth stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock. CSCO, MSFT pay a dividend while FTNT, PANW, ANET do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.